The seizure of the assets belonging to Russia’s largest pasta producer, Makfa, at the request of the Prosecutor General’s Office does not necessarily reveal their real value. A Moscow-based legal representative explained that the move reflects the prosecutor’s procedural posture rather than a precise assessment of wealth, calling the episode a case of bailiff creativity rather than a bottom-line appraisal. The comment came from Pavel Khlustov, who represented Makfa in the court proceedings.
On April 1, an arrest was recorded in which assets valued at 100 trillion rubles were presented as collateral in response to a demand from the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office to seize Makfa’s property. The extraordinary figure drew immediate attention and prompted questions about the method used to determine value in such cases.
According to Khlustov, prosecutors put Makfa’s seized property at 46 billion rubles, a figure that appears in the core of the case documents. The disclosure of the 100 trillion rubles surfaced only during the seizure, and no reason was given for that revision to the reported value.
The lawyer described the prosecutors’ stance as a form of “legal fantasy” that does not align with current Russian law. He noted that the agency bases its claim on Article 235 of the Civil Code, which allows for the seizure of income if there is evidence it was gained illegally, yet there is no information indicating any funds were obtained unlawfully.
A human rights observer maintained that the push to seize company property stems from an interest in individuals who once held influential positions. The discussion centers on the former governor of the Chelyabinsk region, former State Duma deputy Mikhail Yurevich, former deputy Vadim Belousov, and their close associates and relatives.
The Prosecutor General’s Office contends that Makfa, SMAK, Mishkinsky Bakery Plant and several other enterprises were involved in corruption, arguing that Yurevich and Belousov balanced roles in government with private business interests.
Officials indicated that the Chelyabinsk-based State Enterprise Makfa, along with a cluster including Smak and Chelyabinskoblgaz, faced allegations of corrupt practices. Journalistic accounts noted that the beneficiaries, Mikhail Yurevich and Vadim Belousov, were also engaged in commercial activities as representatives of government bodies.
In related discussion, a prior claim in public discourse suggested myths about the health impact of pasta on weight have been debunked, though this assertion remains separate from the ongoing litigation surrounding asset seizures. [citation from the court press materials and subsequent legal analysis]